Dark matter (and dark energy) is missing.  At least, scientists haven’t been able to find it yet.  It’s the elephant in the room (space), but we don’t even know where the room is, or even if it is a room for that matter.

Dark matter supposedly makes up some 90% of creation.  We, on the other hand, exist in the other 10% (the known physical universe). From that perspective, you could say that we are the tail wagging the dog.  Of course when I say that 90% of creation is missing, it’s probably much worse than that.  The 90% figure is calculated by scientists based on known matter in this universe.  However, we don’t know how big the universe is and on top of that there are no doubt other universes and other dimensions.  It’s very probable, therefore, that we exist in an extremely miniscule part of creation.

I know.  You’re probably asking what does any of this have to do with Jesus.  Well, according to the Bible, there were times when Jesus could not even be recognized by his closest associates, the disciples and Mary Magdalene. Further, Jesus apparently had the ability to disappear through walls.  It’s fair to say, then, that whoever, or whatever, Jesus was defies all logic.  He’s beyond our ability to comprehend, just like the universe.  To wit, an understanding of the real Jesus is “missing,” just like dark matter.

The Bible says that Joseph was the father of Jesus. However, Joseph is not even mentioned in the Gospel of Mark, which is the oldest of the gospels. In Mark 6:3, Jesus is referred to simply as the “son of Mary.” Besides, why would a 12 year-old marry an old man?

I’ll tell you why, although you might not like it. The Gospel of Matthew (1:18) says that, “His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit.” So, Jesus was an illegitimate child. The Talmud says as much (see also John 8:39).  Further, Matthew 1:25 says that Joseph “…did not have sexual relations with her until she gave birth to a son. And he named him Jesus.” In any event, then, Joseph was not the biological father.

Therefore, we don’t know who the real father of Jesus was.  However, I can tell you this about the ”virgin birth.”  It was accomplished by artificial insemination. Just ask the “angel” Gabriel. Gabriel was no angel yet he somehow predicted that Mary would give birth to Jesus.

What’s missing from the story of Jesus is just about his entire life; for example, his biological father, the “missing years” from Jesus’ life which were approximately from age 12 to age 29, his marriage to Mary Magdalene (although their marriage ceremony is in the Bible disguised as the Wedding at Cana), his children, in effect the Holy Grail, and most importantly his body after the crucifixion. Much of his life is like dark matter. It’s simply missing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

 

No one wants to immigrate to a socialist country according to Rachel Campos-Duffy.  So, why is what Duffy says important?  Perhaps, here’s why.

Duffy is Hispanic. Her grandparents immigrated from Mexico. She has a degree in Economics and a masters degree in International Affairs.  Further, she understands what any student of economics understands, that true capitalism is the driver of world prosperity.  Everyone understands, except AOC that is.

More from Duffy:

 “The desperate people of Central America who come to our border are not actually refugees. They are economic migrants. They are lining up to come to our country because of our free enterprise system…They come here for capitalism.  They are fleeing socialism…It is purely ironic that AOC, a Latina, is the leader of America’s socialist movement because no one knows better than Hispanics that these ideas do not work…Socialism leads to desperation.  It leads to indignities.  It leads to hunger and it leads to death.  You would know that if there wasn’t a blackout in your textbooks about all the atrocities done in the name of socialism.” – from a speech before Young America’s Foundation

Aye, the textbooks. There’s the rub. One need only read the writings of Karl Marx or Vladimir Lenin to understand where socialism leads.  However, you will never read about those things in a textbook and you will almost never hear a professor talk about such things in any college, unless, of course, they want to be fired.

So, why is AOC promoting the Green New Deal when she has a degree in economics and why can’t she explain to those who are asking how this program works, economically speaking. The answer is really quite simple: because AOC knows that this program would be an economic disaster for the country (and she doesn’t care because she is a socialist).

Yet, AOC and most of the Democratic candidates for the 2020 Democratic nomination tout this program. Why?  Again, the answer is really simple.  It’s all about politics.  Saikat Chakrabarti, AOC’s former Chief of Staff and one of the purported authors of the Green New Deal, told us all as to “the why.” In an interview with the Washington Post he said,“The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all… we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”

Yes, a change-the-entire-economy thing. Christiana Figueres, of the United Nations global warming agency, put it slightly differently when she publicly admitted that the U.N. goal was not that of environmental activists to save the world from ecological calamity, but rather to destroy capitalism. If you read Karl Marx, you’ll understand why that is absolutely true.

Socialism is a means to an end.  Get rid of capitalism and replace it with socialism, where all power rests with the State.  Once you have the power, getting rid of freedom is a mere formality….and that’s what Duffy knows and what you should also be aware of. It’s the socialists dirty little secret that you were not supposed to know about, but, of course, now you know.

 

“The goal of socialism is communism.”  – Vladimir Lenin

 

 

 

So, the government is testing the Emergency Alert System again. It’s just a reminder of what is to come. However, I get ahead of myself.

Here’s the deal:

  • The 1stamendment to the Bill of Rights states that American citizens have the right to a free press.  Of course, by now, most people understand that the media is biased with their approval rating sinking to all-time lows.  As a result, our rights to a free press have been abrogated.
  • We are at war and legally have been for almost the last twenty years. Thus, the War Powers Act is still in effect (since we are still legally at war). The War Powers Act allows the President to take over the media.
  • We live in a almost perpetual state of emergency. As the Washington Examiner reported, ”…few Americans realize they have lived under nearly 30 states of national emergency for most of their lives.”  These declarations pre-empt the Constitution.  One of these declared emergencies was signed by Barack Obama on July 6, 2012 and was entitled “Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions.” That executive order grants the President absolute control over all U.S. media, including social media, news networks and news websites.

We are at war and we live under a state of emergency, both of which give the President near dictatorial powers. So, eventually, rightfully or wrongfully, whether you think it is legally appropriate for any President to take over the media…it will happen.  Welcome to the Second Civil War and the death of the media.

 

In reality, the fight in D.C. is about who has the right to use these national state of emergencies, and with it near dictatorial powers.  Then, there is the matter that the U.S. is no longer a republic.  Hasn’t been since 1871. We’re a corporation! It’s a dirty little secret that you’re not supposed to know about…but now you know.”

                     – The Ethical Warrior,  “Government By Emergency Powers”

 

There is a relatively little known Democratic candidate by the name of Tulsi Gabbard.  While she gets only 1% support in the polls, the establishment is keenly aware of her.  The problem they’re having with her is that she doesn’t take the establishment line like all the other candidates do.  The push back against Gabbard, particularly from the media, is what I refer to as the Tulsi Gabbard Effect.

Nobody should care what someone who is polling 1% says about any policy issue.  No one. Yet they do.  In an article by Tom Luongo from the Strategic Culture Foundation entitled “The Empire Is Coming For Tulsi Gabbard,” Luongo explained why Gabbard is such a polarizing figure:

 In the past week she’s destroyed Kamala Harris on national TV, sued Google for electioneering and signed onto Thomas Massie’s (R-KY) bill to audit the Federal Reserve. What does she do next week, end the Drug War?”

 

She is quickly gaining a reputation as a lone wolf in Congress, someone who cares only about speaking the truth.  Her reward will be having to fend off attacks from the establishment mouthpieces (which is the media).  For example, Naveed Jamali at MSNBC tweeted this out after the second debate:

Like Jill Stein and Donald Trump, Gabbard is counting on Russian support….”

 When you incur the wrath from people in Washington, you are either called a racist or that you are colluding with the Russia (or both), especially when they have nothing of substance to say.  Of course, the thing that really gets the establishment riled up is her refusal to support endless wars abroad.  It’s the one topic that you will hardly hear discussed at the debates, except by Gabbard.

The thing you have to remember is that Gabbard with her 1% polling numbers is irrelevant with respect to the Democratic nomination.  However, she is not irrelevant when it comes to bringing up issues, especially those issues the establishment doesn’t want discussed in public. Everyone in Washington is well aware of the Tulsi Gabbard Effect.  It’s a dirty little secret that you’re not suppose to know about…but, of course, now you know.

 

 

The true third rail of US politics is empire. Any candidate that is publicly against the empire is the enemy of not only the state, it’s quislings in the media, the corporations who profit from it and the party machines of both the GOP and the DNC.” 

     – Tom Luongo

 

 

 

 

Political pundits who declared Russia Collusion dead after Mueller’s testimony before Congress, got a wake-up call after the Democratic debate last night.  A confrontation during the debate led to the following hashtag trending on Twitter this morning – #Kamala Harris Destroyed.

I’m not going to get into who said what to whom.  However, the response of Ian Sams, spokesperson for Kamala Harris, to the hashtag was as follows:

“The Russian propaganda machine that tried to influence the 2016 election is now promoting the presidential aspirations of a controversial Hawaii Democrat (Tulsi Gabbard).”

Look, if anybody is truly serious about talking about government interference in American politics then we’re going to have to open up Pandora’s Box – all the way.  For starters, I’m talking about the billions paid to Joe Biden’s son from the governments of China and the Ukraine or the transfer of U.S. uranium to Russia by Hillary Clinton.  So, if anyone really wants to talk collusion – bring it on.

The Mueller Fallout

07/30/2019

 

 

My favorite liberal political pundit is Caitlin Johnstone who is oft quoted by various media outlets.  I like her mostly because she is fearless and is not afraid to openly confront the political establishment.

Here is what she said recently in an article entitled “What Progressives Hopefully Learned From Russiagate:”

 “…I hope progressives have learned that we’re never going to manipulate our way into progressive reform. Truth is the one and only weapon we have…If there’s any strength left in what remains of America’s progressive movement to effect real change, that change will come solely from grassroots populism….”

I agree with Johnstone that real change has to originate with grassroots populism.  The problem is that populism is the platform that Trump is running on (and winning).

In the last couple of years, however, the progressive movement has been hijacked by the radical left-wing of the Democratic Party.  They claim to represent the people and that Trump is “challenging America’s core values”. Well, in reality, the opposite is actually true. What AOC is talking about is that Trump is challenging the core values of her political ideology which are at odds with mainstream America. This explains why AOC has such poor polling numbers. 

Most of the elites and the political pundits live in places like New York City, San Francisco and Los Angeles, completely out of touch with the pulse of America. Real Americans lead pretty mundane lives and call places like Keokuk, Iowa, Peoria, Illinois and Birmingham, Alabama home.  In order to understand their core values, you have to live where they live, work where they work and perhaps pray where they pray.  It would be a real wake-up call for most progressives to understand these people and to learn what America is really all about.

The problem in America is that the political establishment does not represent mainstream America (the people of Keokuk, Iowa), or their core values. So, how are they ever going to have a real “grassroots” movement?  It was none other than Rahm Emauel, former Chief of Staff for Barack Obama, who recently had to warn progressives that open borders and free healthcare for illegals is crazy and stupid (politically speaking).  Unfortunately, no one was listening as blind ideology still rules the day. As usual, Caitlin was right…but her solution, unfortunately, is not attainable.

 

 My skepticism of the official Russia narrative remains so completely unsatisfied that if mainstream media were my husband I would already be cheating on it with my yoga instructor.” – Caitlin Johnstone

 

Everything Mueller

07/28/2019

 

Everyone has an opinion about Robert Mueller’s testimony in Congress.  I wasn’t going to comment but the reaction was so very predictable and all the talking heads were saying somewhat similar things. So, here’s my take:

The Mueller Report, itself, was a legal piece of garbage. Mueller made legal history by changing the Rule of Law from “innocent until proven guilty” to “guilty until proven innocent.” The report was so poorly written, perhaps to obfuscate the truth. Further, it wasn’t even Robert Mueller’s report.  He didn’t even know what was in it (who is Fusion GPS?).

The most interesting thing about the Mueller Report, however, is not what’s in it, but what’s not in it.  Remember, it’s not what politicians say but what they don’t say that matters.  In the case of the Mueller Report, it’s who Mueller didn’t interview (and why).

Here’s just a few of the people who could have testified as to what actually happened, but were not interviewed by Mueller:

  • Natalia Veselnitskaya – Veselnitskaya was the “Russian attorney” at the infamous Trump Tower meeting. She could have testified as to who in the Obama Justice Department granted her special entry into the U.S. on multiple occasions and why she met with Fusion GPS owner Glenn Simpson both before and after the Trump Tower meeting. Veselnitskaya has already given her account of the Trump Tower meeting to Senate investigators. The Mueller Report does not square with her account.

Comment: Mueller didn’t interview her because, if she had told the truth, she would    have had to testify that she was part of a Fusion GPS effort to entrap Donald Trump Jr.

  • Joseph Misuf – Misuf was a central figure in the plot to entrap George Papadopoulos and he was a Russian agent according to the Mueller Report. In reality, Misuf was a Deep State double-spy working with American and British intelligence, with strong ties to Italian intelligence. The Italian government has since fired a number of top intelligence officials who worked with Misuf on the plot.

Comment:  Mueller never even charged Misuf for the crimes that the Mueller Report identified.  Why not?  Because if Misuf had ever been brought to trial, the whole Russian collusion storyline would have collapsed.

  • Bill Binney – Binney is a NSA official. Binney has gone on record as saying that the DNC servers were not hacked from the outside (it was an inside job), therefore, obviously not by the Russians.  Obviously, if anyone knows what happened it’s the NSA.

Comment: The DNC servers were absolutely vital evidence in the case. Despite this, Mueller didn’t examine the DNC servers because he knew that if he did he would have had to conclude that it wasn’t the Russians who hacked the DNC servers.

  •  Julian Assange – Assange, of course, is the head of Wikileaks who published the Hillary Clinton emails that were taken from the DNC server. Assange has said, on more than one occasion, that he did not get the Clinton emails from the Russians. Assange’s source for the emails is a critical part of the Russian collusion narrative yet Mueller did not interview him or Ellen Ratner, a journalist who did interview Assange.

Comment: Mueller already knew what Assange would have said so he didn’t try to interview him (or Ratner).

 

Here’s what the Mueller Report, Mueller’s testimony and the commentary of the talking heads didn’t focus on. The why of it all.  What was the real link between the hack of the DNC servers and the Russian collusion narrative?  Could it be that Russian collusion was simply a smokescreen to obscure the hacking of the Clinton emails by someone on the inside at the DNC, especially if that someone later died a mysterious death? The timeline is the untold story.

As for me, the best part of the Russian collusion narrative was all the spy stuff. There were spies from England, Italy, Australia and the Ukraine.  It was way better than any spy novel.  You just can’t make this stuff up. John Le Carre eat your heart out.

 

“I spent three hours with Julian Assange on Saturday at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Well, I did. One thing he did say was the leaks were not from, they were not from the Russians, they were an internal source from the Hillary Campaign.” 

     –  Ellen Ratner, journalist 

 

 

Politicians make the six-o-clock news for what they say, but it’s what they don’t say that’s more important. Here’s a few recent examples:

What they said: AOC wants to give more rights to non-citizens than citizens.  This time it is free lifetime mental healthcare for the children of illegal immigrants.

What they didn’t say: I am going to solve the problem of America’s homelessness first because American citizens are more important than illegal immigrants.

Why they didn’t say it: Of course, she didn’t say it because she views illegal immigrants’ rights as being more important than the rights of citizens.

 

What they said: AOC wants a 9/11-type commission to find out why the children of illegal immigrants are separated from their families at the border.

What they didn’t say: I know that the immigration laws were written by Congress and since Congress created the problem, it’s their responsibility to solve this problem. Therefore, I’m going to introduce such new legislation into Congress.

Why they didn’t say it: They like blaming others, especially for things that they’re responsible for. Besides, they obviously don’t care about these children or they would pass such legislation.

Comment: President Barack Obama enforced the current immigration rules (and no one said a peep) and President Trump has done the same. How could they have acted otherwise? Of course, this would never be an issue if we had immigration laws like China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Japan or Mexico, to name just a few.  Real countries require tough immigration laws.  Then again, some people don’t want borders because they would prefer that America, in its present form, didn’t exist.

 

What they said: Rashida Tlaib said that we should take money from the rich and give it back to the people who earned it.

What they didn’t say: That the rich actually earned it whereas the recipients, themselves, never earned it since they generally don’t pay income taxes.

Why they didn’t say it: She was speaking to the NAACP.

Comment: While I’m all for taxing the rich to support social programs for the poor, one has to be a bit jaded over a politician’s call to tax the rich.  They usually are simply pandering to get votes.  After all, notwithstanding what anyone says, the elites effectively write the tax laws.

 

If you have something that a politician said that you would like me to comment on, please let me know. Remember, though, it’s not what they say but what they don’t say that matters.

 

It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”

                 – Mark Twain

The Deep State, the Illuminati, the elites and the 1%.  Different faces of the same Hydra.  They infect all social institutions in search of more power, although I’m not sure that there’s much more for them to possess.  In this vein, you might enjoy an article by Charles Hugh Smith posted on Of Two Minds.com.  Here’s the link to the full article: http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2019/07/our-ruling-elites-have-no-idea-how-much.html

In this country, the elites control both political parties.  These days, when they pose as Democrats they generally pretend to be socialists and when they pose as Republicans they generally pretend to be capitalists.  The result is an ideological food fight which is meant to distract as well as divide and conquer.

As we choose sides during this process of polarization, we actually hasten our own demise. Case-in-point is all the name calling over perceived racism.  I can tell you from my own experience that, while racism is a problem, there is actually less racism in this country than in any other country that I know of (and I’ve lived in or visited quite a few).

For example, Japan, a country which I generally admire, is terribly racist.  One of the more interesting side-effects of their racism has been their ability to maintain their ancient traditions (which are better than a vast majority of countries around the world).  They value their traditions above diversity. In fact, they abhor diversity because, by its very nature, it undermines traditions.  So, I give the Japanese a pass on their racism because I feel that they have a right to decide what kind of society that they want to have, even if it excludes me (which it did).

There’s value in maintaining one’s traditions ala the Japanese. In a country like ours (a nation of immigrants), you can’t be all things to all people.  That’s why, in the past, it was so important for new immigrants to quickly assimilate.  Today, however, everyone wants to live in their own ethnic communities and keep their ethnic cultural values.  That quickly becomes a problem with respect to languages taught in school and spoken in the community.  For example, I went into a McDonald’s Restaurant near downtown Los Angeles and the menu was in a variety of languages, although English wasn’t one of them. Worse, nobody spoke English either. I might as well have been in a foreign country.  Actually, in many foreign countries, you can generally find people who speak English although that wasn’t the case right here in America.

When immigrants isolate themselves by not assimilating, the inevitable result is that the country is no longer identifiable by its culture. When you have separate borders within a country (e.g. sanctuary cities), the country no longer has one common border. Bottom line: When you do not have one tradition that everyone observes and when you don’t have one common border you cease to function as a country…but, of course, that was the general idea all along, now wasn’t it?

 

 “We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.”  – President Barack Obama

P.S. If only that were true.

 

 

Some of you have asked who are the liberal elites mentioned in my last post The Man Behind The Curtain. This issue came up when Gregory Meeks, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, got into a Twitter war with AOC and later called her a puppet who was controlled by the liberal elites.

Well, the liberal elites are none other than the Deep State. Saikat Chakrabarti, the man behind the curtain, should actually be thought of as the “woman behind the curtain.”  By that, I mean that Chakrabarti’s wife, Kamilka Malwatte, is the actual connection to the Deep State as she has worked for Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, the most powerful law firm in the world.

This is a glimpse inside the hidden world of politics, the world behind the curtain. The world that you have never been exposed to, perhaps until now. And you probably thought that AOC and/or Chakrabarti authored the Green New Deal.